you mean forman of the early 90's and holy of the late 90's and early 00's? seriously there not even the same era:-(
Excellent post. It happens so often, especially on an overall shallow forum such as this one. Instead of praising the dominance of a certain fighter, the ENTIRE REST of the division is tagged ******, cause we know, somehow, that that dominant fighter can't really be that good....... Laughable reasoning..........
The heavyweight division does not "suck ass". The late 80s early 90s had by far a weaker top 10 then today's heavies.
I agree, I'm telling people all the time that Gigli is quite possibly the best movie of all time but nobody believes me. Everyone is telling me that I'm crazy and wrong, I think the Godfather rivals it but it's just not quite at the same level.
The guy in your avatar lost to the two best man he faced. His brother, lost to Purity, Brewster, and Sanders. Hardly Earth-Shattering stuff. These guys aren't unbeatable. Sure Wlad has improved, but nobody has ever ever come close to testing him.
Maybe that's because he has improved so much . . . You know I think if the Klitschko Brothers weren't dominating, the division would be perceived as BETTER than it is perceived today. You'd have Adamek, Haye, Povetkin, Peter, Solis, Arreola, Chagaev, Chambers, etc... all fighting each other, in what would probably all be competitive fights. And because of this they'd all be seen as better fighters than they are today. But because Wlad & Vitali have dominated for so long, people assume the rest of the field must be weak. It's not the strongest ever, but it's definitely not weak, imo.
No, nobody has had the right style or temperament to test him. The Arreola's of the world aren't going to get it done, but they will sure make him look worse than what Chambers could make him look. It's not coincidence the older brother has taken the come forward guys more often. Not that this at all matters... It would be perceived as being competitive. Not at all or any way good. It definitely is more assuredly weak. If you have to mention guys like Solis who've proved next to nothing, then guys like Arreola who were just overweight and had a padded record. I'll give you Haye, Adamek, and Povetkin. The truth is the HW era is showing more promise, and it seems to be getting better. But how could it get any worse from the mid 2000s...
Look at the rest of the field. The top 10 heavyweights in the Division outside of K-2 are: 2 blown up Cruiserweights(one of whom was dominated by a Light Heavyweight) a fat mexican a fat Nigerian a fat old James Toney a fat old David Tua a pudgy Russian an old 7ft tall side show A guy with hep A pudgy black guy from Philly yeah this a group of champions right there, this division is just breaming with talent.
You have a point, but it's no secret that there is very little talent in the heavyweight division. Look at it this way: In the era of Ali, Frazier, Foreman, etc would Sam Peter EVER be built up as "The Next Big Thing"??? Hell mother****ing no! What about with Tyson, Holyfield, Old Foreman, Lewis, Bowe, etc, would Sam Peter ever be built up as the next big thing in that era? No Way! This era in heavyweight boxing is weak :deal I am a huge fan of the Klits and don't discredit them for it at all, I think they would be great in any era. :deal
Vitali lost technical decisions due to injuries. come on man, at least try to be realistic here. And one of the guys he lost to is an all time great heavyweight, I have him at #3 actually. Byrd? Vitali was winning the fight. I'm not saying they're unbeatable, but I just can't stand how some people approach Vitali's "losses". Also alot of Wlad's problems I believe were due to arrogance and were in his head. He has gone on a great run and has been absolutely dominating his division like none other in the sport, weak division or not :deal